this is bbc news. i'm ben brown live in westminster. the headlines. the government loses its appeal to the supreme court. eight of the 11 judges agreed that parliament not the government should be responsible for triggering the brexit process. any change in the law to give effect to the referendum must be made the only way permitted, but uk constitution, namely by an act of parliament. to proceed otherwise would be a breach of settled constitutional principles stretching back many centuries. the brexit secretary tells mps there's no going back on leaving the eu. we will within days introduce legislation to give the government legal power to trigger article 50 and begin the formal process of withdrawal. we want to make sure

that process goes ahead but we lots wa nt that process goes ahead but we lots want to make sure that our government is held to account throughout this process. with every day that passes, it's becoming clearer scotland's voice cannot and is not able to be heard within the uk on this question. we'll bring you the latest reaction to the supreme court ruling, and we'll be examining its impact on the upcoming brexit negotiations. the other stories this hour. build in the usa — president trump tells us car manufacturers "put your new factories on american soil." rolf harris won't be giving evidence at his second trial over allegations of indecent and sexual assault — as his legal team claims thejury in his previous trial ‘got it wrong'. the man who turned formula one into one of the world's biggest sports, bernie ecclestone, is replaced as chief executive after nearly a0 years in charge. and la la land tops the oscars race — with a record—equalling 1a nominations, including best picture.

hello, i'm ben brown at westminster. in a landmark ruling, the government has lost its appeal at the supreme court over who has the authority to start the process of taking the uk out of the european union. eight of the 11 supreme courtjudges ruled that only mps and peers — not the government — have the authority to trigger article 50 and begin 2 years of negotiations. the president of the supreme court said that leaving the eu would change uk law and the rights of uk citizens — which meant parliament must be consulted.

a short time ago mps were told the government would introduce legislation within days to start the formal process of leaving the eu. our political correspondent carole walker reports. this was a case with profound implications. who should decide the process for taking the uk out of the eu? the decision, taken by 11 of the most seniorjudges in the land, was delivered to the hushed courtroom. today, by a majority of 8—3, the supreme court rules that the government cannot trigger article 50 without an act of parliament authorising it to do so. article 50 begins the formal negotiations for leaving the eu, a process which the judges said would fundamentally change uk law. the referendum is of great political significance,

but the act of parliament which established it did not say what should happen as a result. so any change in the law to give effect to the referendum must be made in the only way permitted by the uk constitution, namely by an act of parliament. the verdict was clear — the judgment spells out why the court had rejected the government's case. the government will comply with the judgment of the court and do all that is necessary to implement it. the woman who brought the case said the ruling reaffirmed that parliament is sovereign. this ruling today means that mps we have elected will rightfully have the opportunity to bring their invaluable experience and expertise to bear in helping the government select the best course in the forthcoming brexit negotiations. is this a blow to the government's brexit timetable, sir? but the government will be relieved

that the court ruled that there is no legal requirement for it to consult the devolved nations, scotland, wales and northern ireland. so the focus now switches to parliament. mps and peers will not try to block the brexit process, but they could delay it. opposition parties are already setting out the changes they will try to make to the coming legislation, changes which could affect the government's whole approach to the negotiations over britain's departure from the eu. we are very clear. we will hold them to account to protect jobs. we will hold them to account to protectjobs. account to make sure british industry does have market access, and we will not allow ourselves to become some kind of offshore tax haven. that is not what people voted for. unless the government concedes a new deal for the british people so that the british people have a say over the final arrangements between the uk and the eu, i will vote against article 50. the snp say they will

table 50 amendments. the prime minister set out last week a path towards the hardest of hard brexits. i don't believe there is a majority for that in the house of commons. i certainly don't believe there is a majority for that across the country, so this is an opportunity for the house of commons to assert itself and to have a say notjust on the narrow question, but on the broader terms of the negotiation as well. downing street said today's ruling will not affect the timetable for theresa may to begin negotiating with other eu leaders. the government will introduce a bill in the commons within days. this will be the most straightforward bill possible to give effect to the decision of the people and respect the supreme court's judgment. the purpose of this bill is simply to give the government the power to invoke article 50 and begin the process of leaving the european union. but the scene is set for some tough parliamentary clashes before the bigger battles with the rest of the eu can even begin.

carole walker, bbc news, westminster. let us hear more from the brexit secretary david davis who you saw in that report. he came to the commons to confirm that government will introduce new legislation. he said it will be a straightforward bill, we gather it will be a very short straightforward bill. he said he trusted that no—one would seek to make that bill a vehicle to thwart the will of the people because, he said, there can be no going back on leaving the european union. last year, the british people made a decision to leave the european union. the government is going to deliver on that decision. last week, the prime minister laid out a plan, a nswered the prime minister laid out a plan, answered every question that's possible to answer, laid down by the opposition and the select committee, seen as clear throughout the world and supported in many places and we are going to deliver on that. it's

going to be, article 50 ruling, it's not going to stop that. we are going to have legislation many the next few weeks and it's going to deliver andi few weeks and it's going to deliver and i think parliament will deliver on the will of the british people. but it is now in parliament's hands and many people even on your own side of the aisle were suggesting they did want a white paper —— isle. what is the downside of having a white paper? the public will wonder about this, because the prime minister's laid out very clearly we wa nt to minister's laid out very clearly we want to be out of the single market but with access to it, out of the customs union but with a customs agreement. arrangements with regard to adjustments. it's very, very clear, i have said time and again that i'm providing information, as much as i can to parliament, without actually undermining our negotiated position. david davis, the brexit secretary.

labour's chief spokesman on brexit is sir keir starmer. he said there is sir keir starmer. he said there is now the opportunity for proper parliamentary scrutiny of the government's brexit plans. mr speaker, if the prime ministerfails in her endeavour, the cost will be borne by families, working people and communities throughout the uk, the stakes are high and the role of this house in holding the prime minister and the government to account throughout the process is crucial. labour accepts and respects the referendum result and will not frustrate the process. but we will be seeking to lay amendments to ensure proper scrutiny and accountability throughout the process. that starts, mr speaker, with a white paper or plan, a speech is not a white paper or plan and we need something to hold the government to account throughout the process. we can't have a speech as

the only basis for accountability for two years or more. that's the first step. there needs to be a reporting—back procedure and a meaningful vote at the end of the exercise. the government should welcome such scrutiny, not try to resist it, because the end result would be better if scrutinised than it would otherwise be. vicki young is with me here at westminster. so david davis, the brexit secretary, says he will introduce a straightforward bill maybe next week, we gather. but is it going to be straightforward 7 week, we gather. but is it going to be straightforward? some mps don't wa nt be straightforward? some mps don't want it to be, they want to put down amendments to the bill, to demand certain things. labour have put out things that they want. they want more parliamentary scrutiny during the process, they are talking about a meaningful vote in parliament on the exit settlement. now, whether they'll get all this is a completely

other matter because thwarting or delaying or trying to block, for labour that is going to be seen as a problem. there are, on the labour benches, absolutely dozens and dozens benches, absolutely dozens and d oze ns of benches, absolutely dozens and dozens of labour mps who think that brexit is the worst idea in the world. what they are not going to do is go against their constituents, many of whom voted to leave, and they don't want to be seen to be going against a democratic process, a referendum. equally, in the house of lords, where people have said there might be problems, i'vejust been listening to the debate, mr getting up. lord blunkett getting up and saying, it would be foolish in the extreme and unthinkable for the lords to block brexit because they are an unelected chamber. there was are an unelected chamber. there was a manifesto saying there would be a referendum, both houses voted for the bill, now the referendum's happened and the commons will have spoken as well, the idea that the lords would then prevent it happening doesn't look like it's going to happen. there's very little appetite in either house to stop theresa may getting her way, triggering article 50, getting the

negotiations started by the end of march. i was talking to alex salmond from the snp earlier, he said they had 50 amendments up their sleeves ready to, well amend the bill. but i mean 50 amendments, surely that could take a long time? but they don't all get selected. we go into parliamentary process here. they look at it, the deputy speaker, they think, are they in orderfor example, the idea that the bill is going to be very short makes it possibly harder to bring in all those amendments, they don't all get selected and debated and ultimately the government has the ultimate weapon where it can timetable the debate and say we are going to spend only three hours on this. if you have a majority in the house of commons and although theresa may has a slender one, she does have a majority, she can pretty much do what she likes at this side. don't forget, this is the process. this isn't about the deal, about whether we are going to be in or out the single market, this is about the process and at the moment, most mps who're staunch remainers, they are not going to block the process

starting. they want a say throughout all of it, particularly at the end. the interesting thing will be about the vote at the end of the process when the deal is being done, does parliament get a say or a veto? david davis says absolutely not, from now on there is no going back, we are leaving the european union and there is nothing parliament can do about it. for the moment, thank you very much indeed, vicki young. the question really is, once this bill is introduced to the house of commons and into parliament, then will the prime minister be able to stick to her timetable of triggering brexit by the end of march? let's talk to owen paterson, former cabinet minister, thank you very much for being with us and a prominent leave campaigner first of all. what is your reaction that it's parliament that has to trigger article 50? very good news. it's a clear vision, we have a timetable

where we are going and david davis said many times on the floorjust now in the statement that we'll still to the maritime table so i was actually looking beyond that. i asked him about the great repeal bill and he said at the moment the intention is to bring in the bill during the queen's speech and it would take up most of the sum searle because there'll be endless opportunities to discuss it —— summer. opportunities to discuss it —— summer. people will be preparing amendments of the bill already?” think they'd be unwise to slow it up because there's a clear vote by the british people, 17.4 million, which is to leave, and most of the questions today about the detail often come up in the great repeal bill, so david was very clear on the floor that they are going to come forward next week as i understand it with a tight, short bill which will not london itself to many amendments. i think those that want

to sew things up would be unwise. we we re to sew things up would be unwise. we were talking to the snp, they were saying scotland didn't vote for leaving the european union, it voted to remain? well, without being brutal to the snp, what part of three words do they not understand — you lost twice. there was a very clear vote to stay within the united kingdom and this was an all—united kingdom and this was an all—united kingdom vote and 17.4 million people voted to leave. i think much more serious about all of this is the absolutely shattering impact it would have on the integrity of the whole political establishment. i think the media establishment, possibly thejudicial think the media establishment, possibly the judicial establishment, if this was not delivered. so a very clear message from the government today, article 50 will be triggered by the end of march and we push on to the great repeal bill in the summer. if it hadn't have been for the case that went to the high court and the supreme court, parliament wouldn't be considering this triggering would it?”

wouldn't be considering this triggering would it? i didn't see this as a hugely important issue. the real detail is the repeal bill. as somebody who wanted to get powers back to parliament i'm not flinchy about having a vote but i think the government was vindicated in having the appeal because there was a split decision on the main question. keir starmer said it was a waste of time and money appealing to the supreme court? that was an extraordinary comment wasn't it, absolutely bizarre thing to say. didn't the government know it would lose? no, i think the fact there was a split decision showed they were vindicated but there are other areas that came into this, not just but there are other areas that came into this, notjust the question of article 50 which is a massive issue for us at the moment where there are treaties and other issues always pa rt treaties and other issues always part of the prerogative what they are defending. the law lords have given a clear verdict, we have a clear timetable now and no grey areas about the devolves which could have been complicated and i think we push on. i'm very confident that article 50 will be done by the end of mash which is excellent and gives

clarity. the biggest danger is uncertainty. i was in berlin on saturday, we had an interesting discussion with a lot of senior figures, people from the commission, government, trade associations, people involved in business, and it came out that the biggest problem we've got would be uncertainty. we had an interesting conference. what is good now is that i can go back to some places and say, look, we have a clear timetable. thank you very much for your time this afternoon. owen paterson. we are going to speak to drive now, the former attorney general —— dominic grieve. how do you see what happens next, following the supreme court judgment you see what happens next, following the supreme courtjudgment that we have already had? we clearly do want to get on with the article 50 process but in doing it, it's important that we keep in mind that article 50 on the basis of how the government's said it, is not

revo ka ble government's said it, is not revokable and there needs to be a sense of direction from the government about how it's going to carry out negotiation. the prime minister's speech went a long way to providing that lardty. but certainly i think it's very helpful if the government can get through the article 50 process, start on negotiation with a very clear mandate from parliament about parliament's mandate from parliament about pa rliament‘s support for what mandate from parliament about parliament's support for what the government is trying to get. and so i would like to see a written document or white paper to set it out because that's normally how we embark on complex negotiations. that said, iagree embark on complex negotiations. that said, i agree with owen, getting the whole thing moved forward is very desirable. but do we need a white paper? surely mps could just vote and say, we vote to trigger article 50? we are trying to achieve much more thanjust 50? we are trying to achieve much more than just triggering article 50. one way of looking at it is, if we just vote for triggering it, everybody could sit back and do nothing and two years' time we fall

off the edge of a cliff into economic chaos. the people's made absolutely clear that's not what she wa nts. absolutely clear that's not what she wants. the speech shows that although she wants us to leave the eu, she wants to make sure we have close economic links with the eu allowing us, so far as possible, to enjoy the benefits of the single market and the customs union, whilst achieving other aims. that makes it really important that she should be seen really important that she should be seen to have parliament's full support in delivering that. that should be part of the article 50 process. bear in mind, once that's happened, the ball is very much in the government's court to how it proceeds with negotiating. parliament can get on with the great repeal bill. but the great repeal bill has absolutely nothing to do really with what happens when the article 50 process comes to an end and the government comes back to parliament with, we hope, a deal which satisfies everybody. would you urge fellow mps and peers in parliament to push this through quickly? that is clearly what the

government want, they don't want any sort of delay, they want it done very, very quickly. they are going to introduce what they call a straightforward bill in the next few days? there is no need for emergency legislation. legislation needs to be taken in its traditionalform through parliament but that doesn't mean it has to take months and months. if parliament concentrates on it, i would have thought that we can probably meet the end of march deadline. probably? i say probably because i am deadline. probably? i say probably because i am aware deadline. probably? i say probably because i am aware that it's going to be quite ambitious to do this in eight weeks. it can be done if parliament's given enough time to deal with the various component parts. but what is quite clear is you have to give the normal proper intervals between say second reading and taking a bill on the floor of the house at committee stage to enable people to give proper consideration to it. otherwise, you will start to forfeit parliamentary support and it's unnecessary anyway because quite frankly, i want to see this triggered by the end of march, but if it were to slip for a week, i don't think the world is about to

come to an end quite frankly. we must get it done but in a way which provides a lot of clarity and support to the government for the negotiating process on which it's going to embark thereafter and what we can't do is to rush it and just leave everything hanging in the air because at that point, that will be exploited by those who're negotiating with the government because they won't have parliament's full backing. that's what we've got to try and achieve. thank you very much for talking to us. interesting to hear that point of view, there are some mps who we have talked to who do want to rush it and some who don't want to rush it. the ramifications and the implications of that supreme courtjudgment today still being digested here at westminster. for now, back to the studio. it's another busy day for president trump. he's had talks with major car

company executives, urging them to build more plants on home soil, while later the president is meeting the cia director who's now won senate approvalfor the cia director who's now won senate approval for his appointment. the secretary of state nominee has also emerged from a senate grilling and is expected to be confirmed in thejob later this and is expected to be confirmed in the job later this week. so, and is expected to be confirmed in thejob later this week. so, let's hear a little of what donald trump had to say to the car company bosses who may have been wary about what to expect after some of mr trump's highly critical campaign comments. we have things happening here

bigley. it's the long—term jobs we want. we are bringing manufacturing back to the united states bigley, we are reducing taxes and reducing unnecessary regulations and we want regulations but we want real regulations but we want real regulations that mean something. mark and were together yesterday and i think we understand that. we are going to make the process much more simple for the auto companies and for everybody else that wants to do business in the united states. i think you are going to find this to be from have inhospitable to extremely hospitable. i think we'll go down as one of the most friendly countries. right now it's not. i mean we have friends that want to build in the united state, then they can't get their environmental permit over somebody nobody ever heard of before and it's absolutely crazy. i am to before and it's absolutely crazy. i amtoa before and it's absolutely crazy. i am to a large extent an environmentalist. we are going to make it a short process and we are

either going to give your your permits or not and you will know quickly. we'll be very friendly. gary o'donoghuejoins quickly. we'll be very friendly. gary o'donoghue joins us now. certain things in the pipelines? an irony in the juxtaposition because these two pipelines have been hugely controversial. president obama vetoed the keystone pipeline running from canada and effectively going down to nebraska and links up there through to the gulf coast where it's refined. huge pipeline, 1200 miles i think in length, something like that, 870,000 barrels a day that was going to carry, it looked like that was dead in the water, now donald trump's revived that. he's also given the go—ahead for this dakota access pipeline. you will remember

this one because a few months ago, it caused an enormous amount of anger amongst native americans in the dakotas, violent clashes with police over that one, again a huge long one going from there right through to illinois to hook up to other networks. that's been given the go—ahead as well. that's particularly controversial because the chief executive of one of the companies that is building that pipeline gave donald trump's election campaign $100,000 and he has had shares in those companies and has previously, we don't know the state of the shares at the moment, but that will see him walk into a whole bunch of controversy, not just into a whole bunch of controversy, notjust on into a whole bunch of controversy, not just on the into a whole bunch of controversy, notjust on the environmental grounds but also on whether or not this is a conflict of interest. he's just announce had the pipelines must be built with american steel? yes,

he will renegotiate the terms. it's interesting because the canadian one, the liberal government now in place in mccann da is lukewarm —— in canada is lukewarm about this. it's a question of whether or not they will be interested in a much tougher deal because he'll want to extract something from this trans—canada conglomerate that's building this thing, so we'll see how that pans out. but an indication i think which should be no surprise to any of us that donald trump is going to take some fairly controversial environmental decisions, not least also appointing someone to head up the environmental protection agency who's been involved in slashing a lot of environmental regulations down in oklahoma. we are still waiting for him to nail

down the key appointments. he's talking to the senate leaders this afternoon about things, the republican leader in the senate, he's talking to him and the head of the judiciary he's talking to him and the head of thejudiciary and he's talking to him and the head of the judiciary and the head he's talking to him and the head of thejudiciary and the head of he's talking to him and the head of the judiciary and the head of the democrats. that's a process that does go through the senate, a bit like cabinet posts. he's promised to appoint a conservative. democrats are furious that the post and nominee that president obama put forward a year ago never got a hearing in the senate and was blocked all the way through. so they're likely to cause some trouble over that, but i think they can get their own way. from memory, ithink their own way. from memory, ithink the supreme court ones do maybe need

a 60—vote majority in the senate to get nominated. i'm pretty sure they need 60 votes. gary, thank you very much. it's the sixth day of the inquest into the deaths of thirty british holiday makers, who were murdered by a gunman in an attack on a beach in tunisia injune 2015.the inquest heard more evidence about the deaths of each of the victims of the attack. a short time ago our correspondent richard galpin brought us up to date with the latest events at the royal court ofjustice today we have had some very important evidence again this afternoon in the last few hours. in particular, from

a man calledjim last few hours. in particular, from a man called jim windass from hull. he was on holiday with his wife claire who was killed in the attack and he described the moment when she was killed, it was in the chaos on the beach as the gunman was running amok opening fire with an automatic weapon on the holiday—makers on the beach. he said that they were trying to escape and his wife was hit by a bullet. she collapsed. he went down on the ground with her and, as he looked up, he saw the gunman approaching, firing on other tourists and then, looking at him, you could see him turn and look at him, but for some reason the gunman did not open fire on him as well. what mr windass had to say was about the process of booking the holiday in the first place, and this is a keyissue in the first place, and this is a key issue in the inquest, did the holiday company tui and its subsidiary tomson do enough to tell people about the security situation

in tunisia at the time, there had been of course a similar attack in 2015. the question was asked, did they mention anything about the security situation when you booked the holiday and he said no, no—one mentioned anything about that and he said no—one mentioned anything about the foreign office travel website which is on the foreign office website. he said no—one told him about that. if he'd known about the advice being given by the foreign office, the high risk of terrorist attacks, he said they would never have gone to tunisia in the first place. so this is a very, very important point in this inquest. the lawyer for tui pointed important point in this inquest. the lawyerfor tui pointed out in response that on the tomson website there is a link for information,

including a link to the foreign office advice so this is going to be a real bone of contention in this inquest. we also heard from some other witnesses who talked about a whole litany of failures by the emergency and security services at the time of the attack. one man, a former soldier called kevin hawks said that he had been trying to help someone said that he had been trying to help someone who was lying injured, he'd been shot in the leg by the swimming pool area and called for help. he said some paramedics arrived but he said some paramedics arrived but he said they had absolutely no medical equipment with them and did absolutely nothing. we heard from a retired policeman called michael perry. like all the others he had been on holiday with his wife and he said that there was no security on the beach whatsoever. there was no lockdown procedure, it was complete pandemonium. people

we re was complete pandemonium. people were panicking. he said the staff we re were panicking. he said the staff were panicking. he said the staff were panicking instead of trying to help the holiday—makers, some of the staff were panicking and he, as a senior policeman, had some experience of emergency situations and had to take the initiative to get people to lock windows and doors in the buildings to which they had fled. so a whole littany of issues there for the inquest to look at. richard, thank you. richard galpin. now the weather and john hammond has the latest. a foggy night to come. for others, it has been a nice afternoon. temperatures nudging ten celsius. main concern is the fog. thickening fog and it will cause travel disruption tomorrow morning. the fog area grouse through this evening from southern england up through parts of the midlands. further north and west, no such

problems. enough breeze and enough cloud to prevent much in the way of cloud. further south and east, cold and ice around within the foggy zones as well. some slippery surfaces. the fog will linger through the morning, but it will only lift into low cloud. a greyer day tomorrow. cloudier skies again for scotland and northern ireland. most of the rain holding off. still mild here, nine orten, but chilly further south and east and thursday looks an especially cold day. back in halfan looks an especially cold day. back in half an hour. we're going to take you to the oval office. there is donald trump and he has just office. there is donald trump and he hasjust signing office. there is donald trump and he has just signing executive orders. let's hear from has just signing executive orders. let's hearfrom him. has just signing executive orders. let's hear from him. we're going to renegotiate some of the terms and if they'd like, we'll see if we can get that block line built. a lot of

jobs. 28,000 jobs. great constructionjobs. 0k. constructionjobs. ok. key stone pipeline. this is with respect the construction of the dakota access pipeline. dakota access pipeline. again, subject to terms and conditions to be negotiated by us. this is construction of pipelines in

this country. we are and i am very insistent that if we're going to build pipelines in the united states, the pipes should be made in the united states. so, unless there is difficulty with that because companies are going to have to gear up, much pipeline is bought from other countries. from now on we're going to start making pipeline in the united states. we build it in the united states. we build it in the united states. we build the pipelines and we want to build the pipes. we're going to put a lot of steel workers back to work. 0k. we will build our own pipeline. we

will build our own pipes. that's what it has to do, like we used to in the old days. this is about streamlining the incredibly cumbersome long, horrible, permitting process and reducing regulatory burdens for domestic manufacturing. many of the people that we have been meeting with over the last long period of time, but yesterday, and others, the process is so long and cumbersome that they give up before the end. sometimes it ta kes give up before the end. sometimes it takes many, many years and we don't wa nt takes many, many years and we don't want that to happen. and if it's a no, we'll give them a quick no and if it's a yes, it's like let's start building. the regulatory process in this country has become a tangled up mess

and very unfairto country has become a tangled up mess and very unfair to people. that's a big one. this is the expediting of environmental reviews and approvals for high priority infrastructure projects. we intend to fix our country. our bridges, our roadways, we can't be in an environmental process for 15 years if a bridge is going to be falling down or if a highway is crumbling. so we're expediting environmental reviews and approvals. that's what this is. 0k.

thank you very much. reporter: any comment to the standing rock community. thank you, press. sometime next week i will be making my decision. this week we'll i announcing this week. we have outstanding candidates and we will pick a truly great supreme court justice, but i'll be announcing it sometime next week. thank you all very much. so during his election campaign he talked about deregulation and he talked about deregulation and he talked about deregulation and he talked about more jobs and he talked about america first, so those executive orders that he was signing there to re—launch two controversial oil pipelines and try to cut the amount of regulation around getting

business done. that's what those are around. earlier, he described himself as an environmental and in a meeting with the car industry executives, but he said he still wa nts to executives, but he said he still wants to try and cut down the amount of regulation around getting business done. one reporter there trying to get his reaction after he had given the ok to the dakota access pipeline, it was the subject of protests, tribes of those in 2016 and the press keen to know he'd got any comment for them. obviously, controversial but with the stroke of a pen, he set those projects on their way. we'll keep in touch with anymore developments from washington as they happen. let's return to the main news of the day, the supreme court ruling on the triggering of article 50. let's go back to ben brown for more. ben. thank you very much indeed. yes, we're at westminster. 9.30am, this morning outside the supreme court we heard that historic judgments,

delivered by lord neuberger, president of the supreme court, that by eight to three, the supreme court justices had decided against the government and in favour of parliament, triggering article 50 to kick off the whole process of the uk leaving the european union. well, let's talk to clive thorn who is from lawyers for britain and who made submissions to the supreme court on behalf of the government. you must be disappointed? well, a little disappointed, but it was a legal issue and the judges, the descending judges and the majority, reached views perfectly stainsable on their own interpretation of the law. after the high courtjudgment, the one paper called the judges enemies of the people. what was your reaction now that we have been through the whole judicial process? well, it is a good illustration of thejudicial well, it is a good illustration of the judicial process at work of the there was no question of any of the judges being enemies of the people.

they interpreted the law to the best of that i ability and we should be proud of ourjudiciary of the way in which they interpreted difficult areas of constitutional law. so what happens now, do you think? it is obviously for parliament now to kick—start the whole process by triggering article 50? yes. should that be done quickly? is that the will of the people? i don't think it isa will of the people? i don't think it is a question of the will of the people, but it is sensible that steps a re people, but it is sensible that steps are taken to implement legislation as soon as possible. this matter has been going on for now almost eight months and i think the people do expect that there will be movement in relation to severing our links with the european union. but by helping the government fight this case in the supreme court, it could be argued you delayed the whole thing longer than it needed to be delayed. they could have just accepted the high court decision and then got on with it? that's possible. that's possible. there was a view that they should have done that and legislation should have

been passed two months ago after the high court decision. but they chose to go to appeal and one had to deal with the merits of the appeal as they were presented. and we certainly as an organisation don't regret getting leave to intervene and putting in, i hope, a very sensible and helpful written series of submissions to support the government's position. keir starmer, the shadow brexit secretary said the whole appeal was a waste of time and a waste of money? well, to some extent it was. i wasn't responsible for obtaining leave to appeal. it could have been stayed at that stage and legislation introduced, but it wasn't, the government chose to defend the appeal, or chose to appeal and one had to deal with it in the circumstances which it was put to one. clive thorn from lawyers for britain, thank you. thank you. now that the supreme court has reached itsjudgment now that the supreme court has reached its judgment by 8—3, now that the supreme court has reached itsjudgment by 8—3, as now that the supreme court has reached its judgment by 8—3, as we we re reached its judgment by 8—3, as we were hearing, it is for mps to

trigger article 50, but how is that going to happen? we heard from the brexit secretary, david davis, that a straightforward bill would be introduced to parliament shortly. let's talk to a couple of mps who will be voting on that, stephen kin 0k will be voting on that, stephen kin ok and sarah alney for the liberal democrats. so what do you think happens now? say the bill is introduced next week, do you think it will be pushed through quickly, isn't that what people who voted to leave the eu would like to see? well, i believe that's the plan, that there will be a bill introduced to parliament very shortly. what we have said, what we always wanted to see is that to make an amendment, but the final terms should be put to the people in a further vote. because we're not completely convinced that this is the brexit that people voted for. i don't know that people voted for. i don't know that theresa may is taking a mandate from the referendum to take us out of the single market and release us

from the european court ofjustice and take us out of the customs union. we thought those things would be disastrous for britain and we're not convinced that people want either. we want to see a further vote on the terms and that's what we will be putting forward in an amendment to the bill. stephen kin 0k, amendment to the bill. stephen kin ok, do you think this should go straight through or would you like to see amendments to it? we will be putting down amachinedments. i think it is essential that we see a white paper with a detailed plan. you can't use the lancaster house speech as the source of accountability for this important decision for the next years and months. i think we want to see a really clear commitment on workers' rights, on environmental rights, on holding to the standards that theresa may said she herself would hold to and i think we also need to ensure that we get a deal. it's not acceptable to say that we canjust come it's not acceptable to say that we can just come back with it's not acceptable to say that we canjust come back with no deal and resort to wto rules. i think that would have a catastrophic impact on the british economy. what's wrong with just triggering brexit? the british economy. what's wrong

withjust triggering brexit? i mean, people voted in the referendum. the supreme court said today that parliament has to trigger brexit, go ahead and do it? we want a brexit that's in the national interests and it is our duty as her majesty's opposition to deliver that. it is doing that without recognising the british economy and we're looking for that balanced brexit which is going to deliver on those dimensions. sarah, you are tack youing about a second referendum —— sarah, you're talking about a referendum certainly on the terments of the leaving, but do you think that's what people expected when they voted on 23rd june?” that's what people expected when they voted on 23rd june? i don't think it is clear what people expected from brexit and i don't think that theresa may has a mandate for the hard brexit that she's pushing. britain's interests are to remain in the european union and we don't think this hard breaks thate theresa may is offering us is good for the country and we're very clear

that we are offering opposition on this particular matter. i mean, stephen has just explained what the labour's position, but we don't think it's offering sufficient opposition to theresa may's brexit. 0k, opposition to theresa may's brexit. ok, sarah and neil, thank you very much indeed. well, we are expecting next week at some stage the government to introduce that bill and we will have to wait and see how many amendments to wait and see how many amendments to it there are and how long it ta kes to to it there are and how long it takes to push that bill through the commons and the lords. that's the latest from westminster. back to you simon and annita. northern ireland's finance minister announced details of a public inquiry into the energy scandal which led to the collapse of the power sharing executive. what form does the inquiry take? well, the details have been announced by the finance minister. it will be chaired bya finance minister. it will be chaired by a retired judge. it will be a

public inquiry. hearings will be in public. thejudge public inquiry. hearings will be in public. the judge said public inquiry. hearings will be in public. thejudge said he hopes it will be televised. the inquiry will begin work next week, on wednesday, but there will be no public hearings until after the stormont election which will be held on 2nd march. the judge said he hopes this will get to the truth of what happened in this green energy scheme which dup ministers handled. there was a massive overspend to the tune of £0.5 billion. last night the stormont assembly in one of its last sessions before it breaks up before the election passed a plan put forward by the dup which the dup says will reduce that overspend to zero. there will be intense media scrutiny on this public inquiry whenever it does get under way. the hearings and public will come after the stormont election, but you can expect during the election campaign there will be plenty more questions being raised about the renewable heat incentive. the dup said they're glad there will be a public inquiry and they've got nothing to hide. chris page, thank you very much. in a moment a look at how

the financial markets in europe closed the day, but first the headlines on bbc news: the uk's highest court rules that parliament must give its approval before the government can begin brexit talks. president trump urges the bosses of the big three us car manufacturers to build new plants on american soil. the lawyer delved defending rolf harris tells a court that the former entertainer won't give evidence at his trial. hello. now a look at how the markets in europe have ended the trading session. well, the ftse 100 traded mostly in the green today helped by a weaker pound. sterling fell around 0.6% after that news that the supreme court ruling on brexit. now the pound has largely welcomed parliamentary scrutiny on brexit. some analysts point to increasing uncertainty that led to the slight dip in value. hsbc will close a further 62 bank branches in the uk in 2017

because of the growth of mobile and internet banking.the bank because of the growth of mobile and internet banking. the bank was singled out in a survey by consumer group which? in december as having closed the most branches in 2015 and 2016. the closures will lead to 180 redundancies, although it hopes to redeploy staff. bt has issued a shock profit warning after revealing that the impact of an accounting scandal in its italian business is nearly four times worse than originally thought. the company had said it believed the impact of the scandal to be around £145 million, but now says the write—down is expected to be as high as £530 million. shares in the company plunged more than 19% in early trade. let's get detailed analysis of those stories from russ mould, investment director at aj bell. let's start off with bt. it has got

a pension scheme review coming up in a pension scheme review coming up in a few months. itjust bought ee. it is not great timing for them, is it? in terms of the profit warning, no. there are three major concerns the market has got. the first is this italian situation which is embarrassing, that over £500 million loss was due to accounting irregularities. embarrassing, not life threatening and it will perhaps hold back this year's profits a bit. the biggest concerns are for next yea r‘s the biggest concerns are for next year's profits where the chief executive warned of slowing government contracts and a slowdown in corporate spending, maybe flavours of brexit there and that will affect future cash growth of the company and he hinted there maybe more investment in the business for things like rural broadband. which is good for customers and not good for the shareholders and that's probably why the share price got hit today. the

implications for cash flow and implications for cash flow and implications to shareholders. let's move on to hsbc, they will close a few branches across the uk. they have said that's because there is nor digital services and people are using mobile banking and online banking and that's what they will concentrate on. do you think there will be lots more high street banks that follow in their footsteps? the figure that hsbc quoted 90% of their interactions with customers are done digitally over a laptop or a tablet or mobile phone. it is understandable this they are looking to cut out the costs that they don't need from the branches. you hope that the staff involved will be dedeployed. the key question for hsbc it as it moves from branches to digital, it has to invest in cyber security, there was the attacks on the january in january 2016. there will be no free lunch. they will have to keep investing in the

underlying strength of the business. thank you very much. that's all from me. there is a round—up of all the other top business stories on our website — bbc.co.uk/business. thank you. la la land leads the list of nominations for this year's oscars which have been announced in los angeles. ryan gosling and emma stone are up for best actor and actress for their roles in the modern musical romance. the british actors dev patel and andrew garfield are also nominated. meryl streep has received her 20th oscar nomination. about this year's nominations. a short time ago i spoke to film criticjason solomons about this year's nominations. he started off by talking about the success of the musical la la land which has been nominated in 14 categories. musicals get big hauls. la la land nominated twice. i loved la la land. there is a backlash going on and people say, oh, well, it is not

seven brides for seven brothers. there is no westside story. they are young people in love trying to get their dreams and hopes together and they do a bit of singing and dancing because they're so happy. it seems to me obvious the joke because they're so happy. it seems to me obvious thejoke in la la land and people are missing because of the hype, 14 oscar nominations is not going to add to that. some films, they are the ones that the academy like. it looks amazing. i'm inching to see it. it looks wonderful you'll love it. you can blame me if you don't! let's talk about the big theme of the nominations, the diversity after two yea rs of nominations, the diversity after two years of criticism for in some cases, all white nominee lists? well, that's right. you say about la la land tapping into unrest and unhappiness. the oscars so white

hashtag that hung around and the ba ftas hashtag that hung around and the baftas and people were protesting that nominees of colour be it black or brown were nominated in the acting categories, well they've changed that. the ex—president of the academy reated to a scandalous oversight and changed the membership and added women voters and minority voters and that's had a visible effect on the nomination. you mentioned dev patel who is from an indian background and naomi harris and moonlight the movie, which we're seeing now, eight nominations, overshadowed by la la land, eight nominations for this tiny inde movie which might have previously got overlooked. this film might have been overlooked. i'm glad they found

it because i love moonlight as well. the academy has got it spot on with the number of nominations. naomi harris doing a different role and the little kid is brilliant. it is about a kid growing up, the little kid is brilliant. it is abouta kid growing up, so the little kid is brilliant. it is about a kid growing up, so the little kid might be brilliant, but he is only in one bit and then it is another chapter and it is another chapter. it is not out in the uk yet. clearly one of your recommendations. talk about andrew garfield as well given that we're talking about british interest? yes, andrew garfield who we sort of lost to la, spider—man and 99 homes. he plays a soldier in hacksaw ridge, a doctor soldier whose experience of the battlefield turns him into a pacifist. there is a lot of gruelling experience beforehand. the film is directed, i suppose in the directing category, by mel gibson who everyone thought would never work in hollywood again. not only is

he working in hollywood again, he is back at the top of the tree with best director. i found back at the top of the tree with best director. ifound it back at the top of the tree with best director. i found it a gruelling picture to endure rather than enjoy. andrew garfield is very goodin than enjoy. andrew garfield is very good in it. it is a very difficult role because he plays a coward who is overcoming his cowardice. it is not my favourite film. it has got four or five not my favourite film. it has got four orfive nominations not my favourite film. it has got four or five nominations which not my favourite film. it has got four orfive nominations which is not my favourite film. it has got four or five nominations which is a surprise, i have to say, particularly with mel gibson, you know, at the top of the hollywood mountain where you would have thought his behaviour and politics might have thrown him out. i'm predicting a politicised year at the oscars. mel gibson, he made anti-se mettic comments. he was persona non grata for a while. he was recorded drunk. there was the whole caboodle, but these days that doesn't kind of necessarily mean your popularity

wanes. lion, the one that dev patel is in. it has a lot of nominations? six nominations. it is about a little indian boy who gets lost on a train and ends up in calcutta and gets adopted by nicole kidman and makes a journey back to find his realfamily. and makes a journey back to find his real family. and here makes a journey back to find his realfamily. and here is dev patel from slumdog millionaire. he is there at the vanguard of this film which is a great local story for a boy who, i don't know, since he was 13. he was appearing in skins on tv. so this career, he has somehow managed to reach the top of his game here. it is a great little film about home and what it means and why you have to find your roots which i think is what the oscars are doing this year with certainly with the expanded acting categories and the different ethnic diversities that we're seeing. different stories from around the world.

huw edwards is along at 5pm. before that, a weather update. we have had a day of contrast. some of us have been sunny and for others it has been dull and cloudy, but the fog is the main concern with disruption likely later on this evening in some areas. check out your bbc radio station or the updates. your bbc radio station or the y your bbc radio station or the updates. foggy across southern coastal areas and the fog will grow across parts of the midlands and eastern england as well. further north—west, no real problems with fog. it is milder and breezier and patchy rain for scotland, but otherwise, no real concerns and temperatures staying well above freezing. a chilly night further south and east and in the foggy areas we could see icy stretches as well. take it steady on the roads. the fog lingering into the day. it will probably lift into low cloud. a grey day across southern and eastern areas. a slice of sunshine from the south—west through wales and into northern england. most of northern

ireland and scotland getting cloudy, but mild and double figures here. chilly across the south east and a particularly cold day coming up on thursday. today at five: a parliamentary bill is expected within days leading to the start of the brexit process. it follows a ruling by the uk supreme court that ministers must be consulted before the process can begin. so any change in the law to give effect to the referendum must be made in the only way permitted by the uk constitution, namely by an act of parliament. to proceed otherwise would be a breach of settled constitutional principles stretching back many centuries. the brexit minister, david davis, says the new law won't delay the government's plan to trigger article 50 by the end of march. we will within days introduce legislation to give the government the legal power to trigger article 50 and begin the formal process of withdrawal.